n172 Old Judge Pretzels "Getzien/Cetzein" Joke Card

[cyseymour]

I get it, the card is not a joke. If you google "cetzein", the newspaper articles show up, but more recently, whoever put the newspaper online obviously was the one who misspelled the name, not the writer in the newspaper. I'm kind of on limited technology with my chromebook and couldn't really see it in person, but I can see that in the actual newspaper article that it is spelled Getzein.

I still personally found it interesting to learn the etymology behind the name Getzien and what their name most likely was in Germany. As far as the n172 card you posted, is seems like they corrected the similarities between C and G for 1889 in their typeface. The G's have a much clearer dogleg that the 1888 cards do.

I don't expect to be correct about everything, but it is fun to post certain theories, even if not all of them turn out to be true. And I still definitely believe that the Getziens living today must be Amish. This seems the only plausible reason they are not found on the internet, and they must have been highly religious considering the name "Gottsein."

[cyseymour]

Okay, everyone, I actually did a little legwork on this and called both the bureau of census management as well as the Amish Historical Museum. Here is the real story of Pretzels Getzien.

According to the US Census records, there is only one family with the name Getzien/Getzein. Charles was mentioned under two names in the census, once with the spelling Getzien, once with Getzein, but the remainder of the family was only recorded under the name Getzein. They were not Amish, they were Prussian. The Father was also named Charles, as was his son, Charles H., the famous baseball player, who was born in Germany and came to the US at a young age.

Charles H. married and after eleven years, had not had children. Seeing that there was no birth control in those days, it is safe to assume that if they couldn't have children after 11 years, then they never had children. Charles H. also had two sisters, Amina and Sophia.

Being that there were no descendants of Charles H., and Amina and Sophia would have taken on the surnames of their spouses, there were no descendants to carry on the name, Getzien/Getzein.

I called the US bureau of census and they said that census records aren't released until 72 years after they are taken. So the records you see on Ancestry.com are the records of this one particular family.

Ironically, the bureau of census suggested that I google the name to see whether anyone came up. There are services like peoplefinder that record everyone's names. Since there is no mention of anyone with the Getzien/Getzein, I was correct in my original assessment that there is no one alive today with the surname Getzien/Getzein.

[novakjr]

Last names were gotten wrong all the time wile immigrating. Sometimes names were shortened, added to or simply mis-spelled. Try Getzen, Getzendiner, Getzendanner, Getzendaner, Getzenberg. There's a good number of each all over facebook..

[z28jd]

Originally Posted by novakjr

Last names were gotten wrong all the time wile immigrating. Sometimes names were shortened, added to or simply mis-spelled. Try Getzen, Getzendiner, Getzendanner, Getzendaner, Getzenberg. There's a good number of each all over facebook..

I have two different names in my family that were changed to match(not on purpose) names already in my family.

Don't know the original names off-hand but one was a Polish name changed to Sykes, while the other was changed to Phelan. My grandfather's mother and brother-in-law had the same last name in the US but the in-law had a different name before coming overseas and they're not even from the same country. Then his sister married someone with the name Phelan, while his brother had a child with someone whose name was changed to Phelan in the US, again, not related and not the same country.

So basically, good luck with tracing that name once it got here.

[cyseymour]

My name is also an immigration name, so I know all about it.

Based on the German pronunciations, my best guess is still that Getzen/Getzien/Getsein were originally derived from "Gottsein". Maybe some of you have other ideas. Are there any German speakers on the board?

[z28jd]

Seriously, if anyone does speak German, tell me how you would pronounce my last name, Dreker. My family says it two different ways. We actually put the Dreker/Dreker family reunion on the note during our last gathering as a joke.

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by z28jd

Seriously, if anyone does speak German, tell me how you would pronounce my last name, Dreker. My family says it two different ways. We actually put the Dreker/Dreker family reunion on the note during our last gathering as a joke.

Ha! I grew up in a family where my mother and father each pronounced our last name differently. I trusted my mother, of course, but after some study I believe my father's pronunciation is probably correct.

[Joe_G.]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

According to the US Census records, there is only one family with the name Getzien/Getzein. Charles was mentioned under two names in the census, once with the spelling Getzien, once with Getzein, but the remainder of the family was only recorded under the name Getzein. They were not Amish, they were Prussian. The Father was also named Charles, as was his son, Charles H., the famous baseball player, who was born in Germany and came to the US at a young age.

Charles H. married and after eleven years, had not had children. Seeing that there was no birth control in those days, it is safe to assume that if they couldn't have children after 11 years, then they never had children. Charles H. also had two sisters, Amina and Sophia.

Being that there were no descendants of Charles H., and Amina and Sophia would have taken on the surnames of their spouses, there were no descendants to carry on the name, Getzien/Getzein.

I called the US bureau of census and they said that census records aren't released until 72 years after they are taken. So the records you see on Ancestry.com are the records of this one particular family.

Interesting research, thanks for sharing.

[cyseymour]

Joe,

Thanks for posting the high-res OJ scan. It makes clear something I couldn't discern in the book. It would be really interesting to do the same thing with the McCreachery card and see whether it was really meant to be a C or a G. Unless that type of scan is already accessible, that would require the cooperation of the owner of the card, presumably.

Regards

[Joe_G.]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

Joe,

Thanks for posting the high-res OJ scan. It makes clear something I couldn't discern in the book. It would be really interesting to do the same thing with the McCreachery card and see whether it was really meant to be a C or a G. Unless that type of scan is already accessible, that would require the cooperation of the owner of the card, presumably.

Regards

The inquiry into a better resolution scan of McCreachery has been made, but logistics will not allow for a quick turnaround.

Straying a bit off topic, I find the evolution of the negative to be impressive. Not only did "DETROIT" disappear off the jersey but the pin stripes were drawn back in to improve the appearance post "DETROIT" removal. This extends throughout the whole shirt. Somehow, Getzien looks heavier in the 1889 rendition.

[RCMcKenzie]

Joe,

You mention that Lew Lipset actually owned this card for a while. He refers to the card as " McGreachery" in his encyclopedia and states .."none is quite sure who that is supposed to be." So, I assume he also showed the card to anyone who might know more about it at the time.

When was the photo identified as Deacon White? When did people start spelling the name with a "C". I noticed in the 'archive' OJ thread that you refer to the card as 'McGreachery' circa 2005/6.

If you look at the Emil Geiss portrait BIN card on ebay it looks like it could say Ceiss from the scan.

[slidekellyslide]

Internet newspaper archives are littered with misspellings because the machines that read the papers and translate it onto the internet confuse letters all the time. This is very common.

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

Joe,

If you look at the Emil Geiss portrait BIN card on ebay it looks like it could say Ceiss from the scan.

Looking at the Geiss scan closely, I can see that at the bottom of the first letter of his name, there is a small point sticking out to make it a G.

Looking at the McCreachery card in the book, the letter C, it really does seem like there is something there that makes it a G instead of a C. This is just conjecture, but I am becoming more and more convinced it is really a G.

I looked up the census records for the name "Greacher" on Ancestry.com, and it turns out there were some people (two or three) with the name of Greacher who were living in the US at that time.

http://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/s...p=0&gl=35&gst=

It could be that the name is Greacher, and that my original theory that was the first post in the other thread, that the name was spun to seem Irish by putting a "Mc" and "y" on it, may have been right all along.

[Joe_G.]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

Joe,

When did people start spelling the name with a "C". I noticed in the 'archive' OJ thread that you refer to the card as 'McGreachery' circa 2005/6.

The card was studied during the writing of the Old Judge book (2008-2009) and we felt it was McCreachery. Prior to this, I knew the card as McGreachery based on Lew Lipset's 19th Century encyclopedia. I would like to take a closer look at it and hope to eventually have a high resolution scan for all of us to study. This will take some time however due to owner and card locations. As has been stated several times, the "C" and "G" look nearly the same so it is easy to confuse them. More to come . . .

On a side note, we made 100s of changes and updates to previously available materials regarding the Old Judge set when we published the book. A change from McGreachery to McCreachery was not unusual given the sheer volume of other changes that were made. Many of our updates were minor such as switching order of poses for a player to match chronology of photos (Tip O'Neill - 3 different photo shoots from 3 different years) or the countless pose description changes to reflect a more consistent pose nomenclature. Many more discoveries have been made since the book, some of them being covered in short articles in OC Magazine such as the Gypsy Queen cards that constitute new poses and the discovery of Tug Wilson under the guise of Joseph Miller. I continue to study Detroit OJs in the smallest of details while Jay seems to do the same for all teams! Most of the missing poses have also been located. Its a fascinating set that is so rich in history. I'm so thankful for Goodwin & their little photographic baseball keepsakes.

[Joe_G.]

I was able to take a scan today, thought I'd bump this back to the top.

Originally Posted by cyseymour

The G's have a much clearer dogleg that the 1888 cards do.

It can be difficult to distinguish between a "C" and "G" every year of issue, the cards are small and the block text names even smaller. Just look at the 1887 "Ceiss"(sic) currently on eBay. It often takes either a high resolution scan, magnifying glass, or knowledge of who is in the set (a checklist) to keep it straight. And if the card is faded, forget about distinguishing between the two. I took a higher resolution scan of my 1888 Getzien for comparison to the 1889 example. Both are clearly a "G", but the 1888 name is slightly smaller making it a bit tougher to make out. The similarities between the two letters can also be studied while looking at Goodwin's advertising at the bottom of the card.